You picked an argument with me on this thread where I was arguing about the hypocrisy and stupidity of the chickenhawk argument advanced by several posters including Glennwald himself at several points (though not explicitly in this thread).

I didn't read the original post that way at all, but we each have our own POV.

If you don't have a problem with what I am saying about it - that military experience or no military experience should have no bearing on the assessment of war supporters and that those who pretend that it does are dishonest opportunists - then stop arguing with me.

For some people, military service is a contributing factor to how 'seriously' to take a given argument. Like it or not, everyone has their own prejudices and outlooks, so I would only say automatically calling them 'dishonest opportunists' is neither wholly accurate nor automatically deserved.

That's just my opinion, as you have yours.

End of story.

Despite Elephantman's spiritless defense of him and his stances, there are some very practical reasons to doubt McCain's adequacy to lead the country.

First and perhaps most pressing is his apparent contempt for the American public and its health, as exemplified by his approach to health care.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15066.html#more-15066

Second, no less pressing but somewhat more anecdotal, is his famous temper:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/129660

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15067.html#more-15067

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14403.html

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=286415470273826

If the man is going to explode at foreign dignitaries and embarrass himself like this, precisely how is he expected to deal with complex crises that will doubtless arise in coming years?

An equal-opportunity hothead is still a hothead. Forgive me if I have misgivings about giving someone with such little self-control access to nuclear weapons.

The "Bomb Iran" parody of the Beach Boys' "Barbara Ann" dates back to the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979, and a comedy sketch song by The Capital Steps, who featured it on one of their early NPR (that great organ of right-wing thought) specials.

And if he'd butchered the Star-Spangled Banner instead?

None of the liberals of the day were offended, outraged or surprised. It was a joke.

The audience may have considered it a joke. The bobble-heads on talk telly and radio may have considered it a joke.

Many of the rest of us viewed it with concern (to put it mildly), especially in light of the Senator's temperament and continued support of the occupation of Iraq.

Maybe comedy doesn't cross party lines. After all, some of you probably think Michael Moore is clever.

Well he is. Informative as well. Maybe facts don't cross ideological lines after all.

Was that Farrakhan, or Rev. Jeremiah White?

You're really off your game, son. Maybe you should have a little lie-down and another malt whiskey before you try anything this strenuous.

I don't think its possible to get more succient or attention grabbing. My compliments to whoever suggested it.

1. Paranoid Rants - "dismantling of our Constitutional framework, the creation of a lawless Surveillance State and a virtually omnipotent President"

While you are correct that the FISA debate has been temporarily stalled, it isn't over. Add to that the frequent claims for ever more authority under the Chief Executive and you get an Office that while perhaps not literally omnipotent, it exercises authority and powers far beyond its original conception.

I personally think your anti-FISA arguments have been over the top. I believe that the drift-netting and data-mining techniques are meant to spot, and stop, terrorist activity. I admit that I can't prove that. On the other hand, I don't see the system as having caused big problems, hence use of the term "paranoid".

Glenn hasn't been posting 'anti-FISA' agruments. He's simply been noting how the surveillance practices the Bush Administration has been reportedly engaging in have been done without legal warrants, and thus is illegal. The precise technical details are a secondary concern, as is whether or not its actually been an effective tool (both dubious issues in and of themselves).

As to whether such a system is a 'big problem', I direct you to Glenn's post a couple weeks back on the "Banality of the Surveillance State". The danger of assembling such massive databases without serious legal limits or oversight is that, like it or not, the information will inevitably be used. Perhaps not for the purposes it was originally intended, but there is little doubt someone at sometime will make use of it against those listed. Its human nature to seek advantage, and having access to such unregulated data is a major one no sane person would think to pass up.

2. Colorful Language - "Drudgian Freak Show", "media-led Freak Show referendum", "sickly weakness"

Oh, very colorful, though I've no idea how this compares to Coulter's frequent invocations of "Treason" and Hannity's devoting a book to "saving America from liberalism". Guess its a matter of taste and ethics.

3. Broken Logic - "Many liberals, Democrats and other opponents of this right-wing faction have been squeamish in the past about engaging these low-life Freak Show tactics"

An unfortunately accurate assessment. Perhaps DeSade was right and only vice is rewarded while virtue is punished.

apparently you haven't read sidney blumenthal's columns.

The same Sideny Blumenthal of "The Clinton Wars" and "The Strange Death of Republican America", correct? For every Blumenthal you can find a dozen Kristols, Hannitys, and so on. Its a question of prevalence, you see, not isolated cases.

I don't mind that you sell your ideas hard. I mind that people make judgements based more on their emotion rather than objective reasoning. Do Republicans make emotional appeals?

A silly question.

Yes. I stand by my comparison of your efforts to that of Ann Coulter.

Except for a small point: Glenn writes factually and coherently, Coulter does not.

I don't see how any of this is a "talking point".

May I suggest you get a new pair of glasses then?